Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
Claims 29, 33, and 39-43 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claims 29, 33 and 43 define the variable “N.”
In claim 39, line 6, “the first location of the first” should be “a first location of a first.”
Appropriate correction is required. All claims depending on the objected above are also objected to for their dependencies.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 25, 34, and 36-39 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kucera et al. WO 2023/193918 (Kucera).
Regarding claim 25, Kucera teaches a method for performing wireless communication by a first device (UE1/UE2, see Fig.11), the method comprising: obtaining information related with a sidelink (SL) positioning reference signal (PRS) configuration (1101 in Fig.11, note [0127]); receiving a first SL PRS (1103 in Fig.11, receiving SL PRS1); obtaining information related to a first location of the first device, based on the first SL PRS (note [0042], location of the UE may be estimated based on PRS); receiving a second SL PRS (1102, SL PRS 2 in Fig.11). Although Kucera does not explicitly teach transmitting, based on the first SL PRS and the second SL PRS, information representing whether the retransmission of at least one of the first SL PRS and the second SL PRS is required, Kucera further teaches re-transmitting SL PRS 2 (with updated SCI) for the purpose of updating SL control depending on the circumstances of collisions (note [0138]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Kucera’s re-transmitting step, as stated on [0138] into the embodiment in Fig.11 wherein step 1105 of rescheduling SL PRS 2 would be performed of re-transmission, thus allowing the overall system to overcome the problem of collisions. Please note that although the claim recites the limitation of “transmitting… at least one of the first SL PRS and the second SL PRS,” the limitation is interpreted herein to mean “transmitting one of first or second SL PRS” that is taught by Kucera, as explained above.
Regarding claim 34, Kucera further teaches wherein based on a time of reception of the first SL PRS and a time of reception of two or more SL PRSs, the information related to the first location of the first device is obtained (note [0042], at the time of reception of the first SL PRS, the location of the UE may be estimated based on PRS, wherein this may also depend on the time of reception of other SL PRSs as collision of the SL PRSs may interfere with receiving the SL PRSs properly).
Regarding claim 36, Kucera further teaches wherein the information related with the SL PRS configuration includes information related with an SL PRS sequence (note [0088]).
Regarding claim 37, Kucera further teaches wherein the information related with the SL PRS configuration includes information related with an SL PRS resource element (note [0100 - 0106] SL PRS resources).
Regarding claim 38, the claim is rejected as applied to claim 1. Kucera further teaches a processing device adapted to control a first device, the processing device comprising: at least one processor; and at least one memory operably connectable to the at least one processor and storing instructions that, based on being executed by the at least one processor, perform operations recited (see 1510 and 1520 in Fig.15).
Regarding claim 39, the claim is rejected as applied to claim 1. One of ordinarily skilled in the art would recognize from the explanation provided in claim 1 that first and second devices may be performed by UE 1 and UE 2 in Fig.11 of transmitting/receiving the SL PRS.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 26-33, 35, 44 and 40-43 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Farag US 2023/0309123 discloses transmission and retransmission of SL PRS.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAM K. AHN whose telephone number is (571)272-3044. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9-5PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SAM K AHN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2633
Prosecution Insights